Skip to content
The Denali Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Denali Foundation

Its FY2019 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$61k
Granted FY2019
7
Grants FY2019
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2019.

Youth Development$67kRecreation & Sports$31kEnvironment$21kAnimals$3kHuman Services$2kPhilanthropy$605
02FY2019 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k4 grants · $3k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $58k
$1,156
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BUSHY HILL NATURE CENTER$19,617
COMMON GROUND$19,000
Individual grant recipient$19,000
ANGEL CHARITIES$1,156
BURROUGHS COMMUNITY CENTER$886
KIDS IN THE CANYON$722
GREENWAVE$643
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $823) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%PARADOX SPORTS: $823 → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Watertown Land Trust

Preservation of open space in watertown, ct; maintenance of owned and conserved properties and public education of enviromental issues.

—
2
Kestrel Land Trust

Kestrel land trust conserves and cares for forests, farms, and riverways in the connecticut river valley of western massachusetts while nurturing an enduring love of the land

Environment
3
North Central Conservation District Inc

To provide leadership and take initiatives for locally led conservation with the goal to protect soil, water and other natural resources of north central connecticut.

Environment
4
Norwalk River Watershed Association Inc

To protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the seven-town Norwalk River Watershed

Environment
5
Massachusetts Outdoor Heritage Foundation Inc Attn Susan Sacco
—
6
Save New Canaan Inc

Save New Canaan Inc. (the Corporation) was formed to promote sustainable and appropriate development, as well as to advocate for the protection of open spaces, wetlands and other public trust goods, such as road, water and sewer…

Environment
7
Kestrel Land Trust Inc

Kestrel land trust inc. conserves and cares for forests, farms, and riverways in the connecticut river valley of western massachusetts, while nurturing an enduring love of the land

Environment
8
Squannacook Greenways

Squannacook Greenways' goal is to build, maintain, and promote the Squannacook River Rail Trail (SRRT) as a source of recreation and safe non-motorized transportation. The Squannacook River Rail Trail is a proposed conversion of…

Recreation & Sports
9
Farmington Land Trust

The Farmington Land Trust Inc protects open space in the town of Farmington CT through the acquisition of open space, stewardship of acquired land, education of the public about the importance of open space and advocacy that ensures…

Environment
10
New London Greenwich Rail - Trail

To enhance the New London and Greenwich communities

Recreation & Sports
11
Groundwork Rhode Island

Groundwork rhode island (gwri) is a community-based organization helping build healthier, more resilient, and more equitable urban communities in rhode island by improving the physical environment and creating economic opportunities for…

Environment
12
Manchester Land Conservation Trust Inc

To engage in and otherwise promote the benefit of the general public the preservation and conservation of the natural resources in the greater manchester, connecticut area, including water resources, swamps, woodlands and other spaces, and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Last Green Valley Inc the Last Green Valley Inc; the most unlike its peers is Angel Charities Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 32 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMON GROUND: $30,584 · OtherCOMMON GROUNDBUSHY HILL NATURE CENTER: $20,705 · OtherBUSHY HILL NATURE CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $19,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNEW HAVEN PARK AND RECREATION: $4,000 · Other+12 more: $11,203 · Other+12 moreGATHER NEW HAVEN INC (FORMELY NEW HAVEN LAND TRUST INC): $15,000 · EnvironmentGATHER NEW HAVEN…WOONASQUATUCKET RIVER WATERSHED: $1,250 · EnvironmentWOONASQUATUCKET …SOUTH KINGSTOWN LAND TRUST: $800 · Environment+3 more: $1,005 · Environment+3 moreCT CYCLING ADVANCEMENT PROGRAMINC: $2,211 · Recreation & SportsNEW ENGLAND MOUNTAIN BIKE ASSOCIATION INC: $1,832 · Recreation & SportsBURROUGHS COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $886 · Recreation & SportsA PLACE CALLED HOPE INC: $1,679 · AnimalsSOLAR YOUTH INC: $1,000 · EducationGREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP: $643 · EducationPARADOX SPORTS: $823 · Human ServicesUNITED WAY OF GREATER NEW HAVEN INC: $605 · PhilanthropyWAKEMAN BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB CORP: $560 · Youth Development
Other$95,492Environment$18,055Recreation & Sports$4,929Animals$1,679Education$1,643Human Services$823Philanthropy$605Youth Development$560

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGATHER NEW HAVEN INC (FORMELY NEW HAVEN LAND TRUST INC): $15,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetNEW ENGLAND MOUNTAIN BIKE ASSOCIATION INC: $1,832 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWOONASQUATUCKET RIVER WATERSHED: $1,250 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAngel Charities Inc: $1,156 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSOLAR YOUTH INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBURROUGHS COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $886 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPARADOX SPORTS: $823 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP: $643 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LAST GREEN VALLEY INC THE LAST GREEN VALLEY INC: $405 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOLD SAYBROOK LAND TRUST INC: $310 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetAVALONIA LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $290 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Pfizer Foundation…PatagoniaorgCitizens Charitable F…National Fish and Wil…The Chicago Community…The Bank of America C…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…
The Pfizer Foundation IncNY18.7× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · Citizens Charitable Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Denali Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Denali Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • The Last Green Valley Inc the Last Green Valley Inc: 72% of income from government
  • Old Saybrook Land Trust Inc: 56% of income from government
  • United Way of Greater New Haven Inc: 42% of income from government
  • Avalonia Land Conservancy Inc: 21% of income from government
  • Solar Youth Inc: 19% of income from government
  • Wakeman Boys and Girls Club Corp: 11% of income from government
  • Gather New Haven Inc (Formely New Haven Land Trust Inc): 11% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 32 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Denali’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home